Who is the better Hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?

Who is the better Hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?

  • Total voters
    117
Roger2003Wimbledon

Roger2003Wimbledon

Banned
Who is the better Hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?

Grand Slams: Davydenko 0 Nadal 2

GS finals: Davydenko 0 Nadal 4

YEC: Davydenko 1 Nadal 0

Masters: Davydenko 2 Nadal 6

ATP titles: Davydenko 8 Nadal 12

From these stats it is quite clear than Nadal is the superior hard court player, however Davydenko completely owns Nadal on hard courts 6-1. Surely despite Nadal having achieved much much more than Davydenko on hard courts, Davydenko is the superior player due to the H2H.

:confused::-?:confused:
 
Matchups are not indicative of how great a player is, they are just that, a matchup to one other player. If we decided greatness by matchups then Nadal would be GOAT. So obviously Nadal is the hard court player.
 
papertank said:
Matchups are not indicative of how great a player is, they are just that, a matchup to one other player. If we decided greatness by matchups then Nadal would be GOAT. So obviously Nadal is the hard court player.
Click to expand...

Oh well, that is exactly what RNadal trollboys follow. +ve H2H >>>>> Any achievements.

To answer OP's question:

Unbiased opinion: RNadal
RNadal's trollboy logic: NDavydenko
 
Davydenko in the sense that his game suits hardcourt more...aggressive from the baseline, taking the ball early etc. He often beat Nadal on HC for a reason.

However, the comparison isn't fair because Rafa is of course a much better and more accomplished player overall. I voted Davydenko to give him some deserved credit in terms of the question, but if you're as good as Rafa then of course your results are going to be better on any surface than Davydenko, who is at his best a great player, but who doesn't reach that level consistently enough and is probably not complete enough outside his strengths.
 
Does anyone think Davydenko could beat Nadal at a hardcourt slam? No. No chance in hell. Slam h2h is what tells the story (unless its one of those fluke upsets like 1-0).
 
RAFAwon09usopen said:
Does anyone think Davydenko could beat Nadal at a hardcourt slam? No. No chance in hell. Slam h2h is what tells the story (unless its one of those fluke upsets like 1-0).
Click to expand...
they have not met there. and how do you know? 6-1 is a comprehensive beating. i just look at the facts
 
mike danny said:
they have not met there. and how do you know? 6-1 is a comprehensive beating. i just look at the facts
Click to expand...

But how is h2h relevant? I've only ever valued slam h2h. Everybody knows how chump-like Davydenko is at the slams compared to the non-slams. Slam h2h always tells the story (except for the 1-0 upset-based h2hs).
 
RAFAwon09usopen said:
Does anyone think Davydenko could beat Nadal at a hardcourt slam? No. No chance in hell. Slam h2h is what tells the story (unless its one of those fluke upsets like 1-0).
Click to expand...

Davy is 6-1 against Nadal on hc. Had they never met, you and the rest of his fans would say Davy would never beat him on hc. This "no chance" crap holds no water. In fact, Nadal is lucky not to meet a player who's poses a bad matchup for him.
 
against the tour, nadal is the better HC player. against each other, Davydenko's style of play poses a big problem against Nadal.
 
RAFAwon09usopen said:
Does anyone think Davydenko could beat Nadal at a hardcourt slam? No. No chance in hell. Slam h2h is what tells the story (unless its one of those fluke upsets like 1-0).
Click to expand...

How can you be sure about that ???? :roll:

Nadal lost in HC grand slam to players like Blake, Youzhny, Ferrer, so why not Davydenko ?

4 times on HC Davydenko beat Nadal 2 sets to 0. So why he would not be able to beat Nadal at the AO or US open ??? at least explain !
 
Agreed. Classic example of trying to put conjecture up against facts. Fact is, Davydenko has owned Rafa on HC, whether that's outside of slams or not. They haven't met during a HC slam, so you can't favour either of them. Which brings us back to Davy beating Rafa 6-1 on HC. Done. HC Slams can't be discussed.
 
If anything you have got to favour Davy in a 5 set match. If RNadal failed to take 2 sets off NDavydenko in 6 of 7 meetings how can we expect him to win 3 sets.
 
RAFAwon09usopen said:
But how is h2h relevant? I've only ever valued slam h2h. Everybody knows how chump-like Davydenko is at the slams compared to the non-slams. Slam h2h always tells the story (except for the 1-0 upset-based h2hs).
Click to expand...
facts state clear that davy owns him 6-1. comprehensive beating.
 
Nadal was the better harcourt player and had the higher peak level. Davydenko was a pretty good harcourt player himself and matched up well against Nadal.
 
roberttennis54 said:
Nadal was the better harcourt player and had the higher peak level. Davydenko was a pretty good harcourt player himself and matched up well against Nadal.
Click to expand...

Davydenko even destroyed Ferrer at the beginning of the year, on HC, pick Davydenko is a nightmare to play on HC.
Of course Ferrer is not unbeatable on HC but the way he got destroyed was really impressive.
 
What I wonder is, if Nadal's brain with all it's determination and coolness under pressure, was driving Davydenko's body, how good would Davydenko be? Would he be able to win slams?

What i'm sayig is, is it his game that's prevented him from winning slams, or just the ability to play his game (which is a vital part of being a great player of course)
 
Since Soderling is better clay court player than Djokovic according to many here, than Davydenko must be better hard court player than Nadal.
 
Netspirit said:
According to Nahrds, only the H2H matters, and it is 6-1 on hard courts. So, voting for Davy. )
Click to expand...

Wrong. H2H matters against your main rivals, whom you consistently meet on the biggest stage and are accomplished enough in their own right to hold a similar status. The H2H with Fed/Nadal matters because Nadal was his main rival and a fellow All Time Great.

Davy was a very good player, but he's simply a far inferior player who just matches up well against Nadal. If Davy were more accomplished in slams, you could make a case. But there is none. It's sort of Fed fans looking desperate again.

There's a reason nobody uses Sampras losing H2H with Richard Kraijeck (4-6) against him, even though Kraijeck actually managed to beat Sampras on the way to winning his lone Slam. Kraijeck is nowhere near accomplishe enough for the H2H to be a significant negative against Sampras. People are understanding with bad match-up issues. But there is no such thing as a "bad match-up" between fellow all-time greats.

Davy was a good hardcourt player who matched up well with Nadal in smaller tournaments. At the highest level (slams), Nadal proved a greater hardcourt player, who could reach harcourt slam finals and win them. Davy would need to be far more accomplished at slam level to be able to claim to be better on the surface than Nadal.
 
Last edited:
800887jama.jpg



Why are Renfield and The Maestro RF in green ?
Why tipsa...don'tlikehim! is not in green ?
 
:):):)

This is just desperate by Fed fans.

As has been mentioned, the H2H might have more relevance if Nadal/Davy ever met in slams, and Davy accomplished more in slams. As it is, nobody really cares.

And their overall H2H is respectable for Nadal, despite Davy being a bad match-up for him.

Again, there is a reason nobody holds Kraijeck against Sampras, like they do Nadal against Federer. Not every situation is the same, and it's really childush how literal some people are.

H2H matters deeply with Fed and Nadal because of the context of their careers and rivalry. If Nadal was just some dude who never even made a slam final, but gave Fed some match-up issues, nobody would care.
 
Last edited:
octogon said:
Wrong. H2H matters against your main rivals, whom you consistently meet on the biggest stage and are accomplished enough in their own right to hold a similar status. The H2H with Fed/Nadal matters because Nadal was his main rival and a fellow All Time Great.

Davy was a very good player, but he's simply a far inferior player who just matches up well against Nadal. If Davy were more accomplished in slams, you could make a case. But there is none. It's sort of Fed fans looking desperate again.

There's a reason nobody uses Sampras losing H2H with Richard Kraijeck (4-6) against him, even though Kraijeck actually managed to beat Sampras on the way to winning his lone Slam. Kraijeck is nowhere near accomplishe enough for the H2H to be a significant negative against Sampras. People are understanding with bad match-up issues. But there is no such thing as a "bad match-up" between fellow all-time greats.

Davy was a good hardcourt player who matched up well with Nadal in smaller tournaments. At the highest level (slams), Nadal proved a greater hardcourt player, who could reach harcourt slam finals and win them. Davy would need to be far more accomplished at slam level to be able to claim to be better on the surface than Nadal.
Click to expand...


This makes no sense.
 
Roger2003Wimbledon said:
Who is the better Hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?

Grand Slams: Davydenko 0 Nadal 2

GS finals: Davydenko 0 Nadal 4

YEC: Davydenko 1 Nadal 0

Masters: Davydenko 2 Nadal 6

ATP titles: Davydenko 8 Nadal 12

From these stats it is quite clear than Nadal is the superior hard court player, however Davydenko completely owns Nadal on hard courts 6-1. Surely despite Nadal having achieved much much more than Davydenko on hard courts, Davydenko is the superior player due to the H2H.

:confused::-?:confused:
Click to expand...

Haha great thread.

By common sense Nadal is the better player.

By the standard Nadal fans' logic, Davy is the better player.

Perfect.
 
Last edited:
Funny thread

Of course, history shows us that Nadal had a problem against Davydenko on hardcourts. The question from OP is, who is the better hard court player? The better hard court player is not even debatable. It still doesn't negate the fact that Davy owned Rafa on hardcourts simply based on their head to head. Still doesn't make Davy the BETTER hard court player between the two.
 
counterloop said:
Of course, history shows us that Nadal had a problem against Davydenko on hardcourts. The question from OP is, who is the better hard court player? The better hard court player is not even debatable. It still doesn't negate the fact that Davy owned Rafa on hardcourts simply based on their head to head. Still doesn't make Davy the BETTER hard court player between the two.
Click to expand...

The true aim by the Fed fan OP is to support Fed being better than Nadal despite the h2h. Very transparent.
 
Roger2003Wimbledon said:
Who is the better Hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?

Grand Slams: Davydenko 0 Nadal 2

GS finals: Davydenko 0 Nadal 4

YEC: Davydenko 1 Nadal 0

Masters: Davydenko 2 Nadal 6

ATP titles: Davydenko 8 Nadal 12

From these stats it is quite clear than Nadal is the superior hard court player, however Davydenko completely owns Nadal on hard courts 6-1. Surely despite Nadal having achieved much much more than Davydenko on hard courts, Davydenko is the superior player due to the H2H.

:confused::-?:confused:
Click to expand...

still fed is the only GOAT candidate with a losing record against his main rival (men and women). I'm not saying he is not the GOAT, he is just different:).

BTW UI think that if both play at their peak level davy is quite similar to nadal in hardcourt strength. nadal is not even a top10 all time HC player.

the difference is that he has a much longer and more consistent peak than davy. plus he is good on HC because he is just a good player despite being relatively weak on HC just like fed is one of the best on clay despite it being not his best surface.

nadal has a a solid HC resumee because he is a great player but his HC results alone are not that impressive. If you have 11 slams only 2 wins is not all that great plus he lost half of his HC finals. not impressive compared to agassi for example.

I would even say rafa is worse on HC relatively compared to fed on clay.
 
Last edited:
dominikk1985 said:
still fed is the only GOAT candidate with a losing record against his main rival (men and women). I'm not saying he is not the GOAT, he is just different:).

BTW UI think that if both play at their peak level davy is quite similar to nadal in hardcourt strength. nadal is not even a top10 all time HC player.

the difference is that he has a much longer and more consistent peak than davy. plus he is good on HC because he is just a good player despite being relatively weak on HC just like fed is one of the best on clay despite it being not his best surface.

nadal has a a solid HC resumee because he is a great player but his HC results alone are not that impressive. If you have 11 slams only 2 wins is not all that great plus he lost half of his HC finals. not impressive compared to agassi for example.

I would even say rafa is worse on HC relatively compared to fed on clay.
Click to expand...

Nadal has 2 hard court slams and 2 other finals. Remind me how many RG titles Fed has?
 
Clarky21 said:
Nadal has 2 hard court slams and 2 other finals. Remind me how many RG titles Fed has?
Click to expand...

Well you think Nadal is a HC mug, so how bad do you think Fed is on clay if he's worse?

Actually there is a really complex way of looking at this. Nadal is not bad on HC and Federer is not bad on clay. Federer is maybe better on clay than Nadal is on HC. Stay with me here... he's made 5 RG finals and that's with one slam on clay (same argument as Nadal is unlucky cos only one slam is on clay and there are 2 slams on HC giving more chance to win on HC). Nadal has made 4 HC finals with 2 HC slams. He's not had as much time as Fed, but will he ever make 5 finals at one HC slam?

The thing is, despite making 5 RG finals he only has one because Nadal is too damn hard to beat there. There is no one asgood on HC as Nadal is on clay.So Fed, better all round, Nadal better at dominating one surface. I'm not sure if there's much difference between Fed on clay and Nadal on HC though, but just because Federer only has 1 RG, doesn't mean he's worse on clay than Nadal is on HC, because Federer has had to face the clay GOAT.

Netspirit said:
There are 2 hard court slams, so Nadal had twice as many opportunities. If there were 2 RGs played, Federer would have 2 slams and 10 finals.
Click to expand...

it doesn't work that way, it doesn't mean fed would have exactly what he has now. I don't see him getting 10 clay slam finals tbh.
 
Last edited:
Clarky21 said:
Then don't you think having 2 hard court slams skews certain people's slam count? :wink:
Click to expand...

I do, and if tennis had 2 clay-court slams, Nadal would have a chance to become the undisputed GOAT (however, his opposition on clay would have been much stronger).

But we are not comparing slam counts here, we are comparing their games on their worst surfaces. It is clear that Federer, currently #2 clay courter of this generation, is better on his worst surface than Nadal is on HC where he is far, far from #2.
 
Towser83 said:
Well you think Nadal is a HC mug, so how bad do you think Fed is on clay if he's worse?

Actually there is a really complex way of looking at this. Nadal is not bad on HC and Federer is not bad on clay. Federer is maybe better on clay than Nadal is on HC. Stay with me here... he's made 5 RG finals and that's with one slam on clay (same argument as Nadal is unlucky cos only one slam is on clay and there are 2 slams on HC giving more chance to win on HC). Nadal has made 4 HC finals with 2 HC slams. He's not had as much time as Fed, but will he ever make 5 finals at one HC slam?

The thing is, despite making 5 RG finals he only has one because Nadal is too damn hard to beat there. There is no one asgood on HC as Nadal is on clay.So Fed, better all round, Nadal better at dominating one surface.



it doesn't work that way, it doesn't mean fed would have exactly what he has now. I don't see him getting 10 clay slam finals tbh.
Click to expand...

How's this for controversial. Fed lost to Novak at USOpen in both 2010 and 2011 in order to avoid losing to Nadal. Fed didnt want to lose a GS to Nadal on all surfaces, given that Fed only beat Nadal at Wimbledon in the finals and was aware of the H2h that would not make his history look good, based on being beaten like that by his arch rival.

Furthermore, I posit, that Fed beat Novak in 2011 simply to prevent a GS year by Novak, which would have stuck in his crawl!
 
bullfan said:
How's this for controversial. Fed lost to Novak at USOpen in both 2010 and 2011 in order to avoid losing to Nadal. Fed didnt want to lose a GS to Nadal on all surfaces, given that Fed only beat Nadal at Wimbledon in the finals and was aware of the H2h that would not make his history look good, based on being beaten like that by his arch rival.

Furthermore, I posit, that Fed beat Novak in 2011 simply to prevent a GS year by Novak, which would have stuck in his crawl!
Click to expand...

i seriously doubt he would have got to match point first if he was planning on throwing the match.

Also deciding Djokovic was going to do the calendar year slam at the 2nd slam?

what would he had done at the USO in 2011 had Djokovic won AO, RG and Wimby that year? Avoid Nadal, or derail the CYGS? :lol:
 
Towser83 said:
i seriously doubt he would have got to match point first if he was planning on throwing the match.

Also deciding Djokovic was going to do the calendar year slam at the 2nd slam?

what would he had done at the USO in 2011 had Djokovic won AO, RG and Wimby that year? Avoid Nadal, or derail the CYGS? :lol:
Click to expand...

That's why he went full force at FO. Fed joked it was a birthday present to Nadal, but, i think Fed was savvy enough to know it would have been on Nadals raquet, and wasnt taking the risk. The USOpen losses were Nadal avoidance.

Btw, check out this awesome link regarding dogs

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/dog_paradox
 
Last edited:
bullfan said:
That's why he went full force at FO. Fed joked it was a birthday present to Nadal, but, i think Fed was savvy enough to know it would have been on Nadals raquet, and wasnt taking the risk. The USOpen losses were Nadal avoidance.

Btw, check out this awesome link regarding dogs

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/dog_paradox
Click to expand...

yeah I don't think i'm buying that theory but interesting all the same :lol:

Thanks,I think I have seen that comic before. Very funny though!
 
Netspirit said:
There are 2 hard court slams, so Nadal had twice as many opportunities. If there were 2 RGs played, Federer would have 2 slams and 10 finals.
Click to expand...

And on the flip side, 2 HC slams gives Federer more of an advantage in terms of how many majors he's won.

If there was only one HC major and 2 on clay, Nadal would hold the slam record by now and it would probably be higher than 17.
 
tipsa...don'tlikehim! said:
How can you be sure about that ???? :roll:
Click to expand...
When he puts his 'Vamos!' pajamas on, with the built in footsies, and gazes at the Rafa poster on his wall, it all becomes clear to him.

Davy, clearly. He loved the pace. Nadal OTOH, needs time for his loopy FH. And standing so far back on hardcourts is a recipe for disaster.
 
Netspirit said:
I do, and if tennis had 2 clay-court slams, Nadal would have a chance to become the undisputed GOAT (however, his opposition on clay would have been much stronger).

But we are not comparing slam counts here, we are comparing their games on their worst surfaces. It is clear that Federer, currently #2 clay courter of this generation, is better on his worst surface than Nadal is on HC where he is far, far from #2.
Click to expand...

It's not clear. I mean, I see your point, but one things doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
You can also well say Nadal's peak level on hc is better than Fed's on clay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
  • Poll Poll
Who is the greater hard court player, Davydenko or Nadal?
Replies
0
Views
265
Federer-Slam-King
F
F
  • Poll Poll
Better player- Davydenko or Kafelnikov
2 3
Replies
104
Views
7K
jms007
J
tennis_pro
Is Davydenko a better hard court player than Nadal?
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
King No1e
King No1e
Omega_7000
How many Slams would Nadal have if Davydenko had been as dedicated as Federer/Nole?
Replies
19
Views
2K
Magnus
M
F
  • Poll Poll
Who is the better outdoor Hard court player Nadal or Federer?
Replies
45
Views
5K
Egoista
E
Back
Top